| Revision as of 16:46, 21 November 2005 editHarvestdancer (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,184 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:47, 22 November 2005 edit undoSdedeo (talk | contribs)5,246 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| '''Where is the dispute?''' This is all an invention by Duncharris and should be ignored until he has some proof.--] 20:39, 17 November 2005 (UTC) | '''Where is the dispute?''' This is all an invention by Duncharris and should be ignored until he has some proof.--] 20:39, 17 November 2005 (UTC) | ||
| :The dispute, Gastrich under a pseudonym, is if this is really worthy of being an encyclopeia article. This is not an invention by Duncharris, it's an invention by you. ] 16:46, 21 November 2005 (UTC) | :The dispute, Gastrich under a pseudonym, is if this is really worthy of being an encyclopeia article. This is not an invention by Duncharris, it's an invention by you. ] 16:46, 21 November 2005 (UTC) | ||
| ==accrediting== | |||
| A few things: | |||
| 1. LBU claims that they are listed in the directory, but they are not listed in the directory. I have changed the article to reflect this. | |||
| 2. AACTS has no status with any federal agency. Whether or not it "desires" any status with any federal agency is their business. You can put it in the AACTS article if you like. If you can provide a source from AACTS saying they have not attempted to secure status with the government, then go ahead and put it in. | |||
| ] 21:47, 22 November 2005 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 21:47, 22 November 2005
Where is the dispute? This is all an invention by Duncharris and should be ignored until he has some proof.--Big Lover 20:39, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
- The dispute, Gastrich under a pseudonym, is if this is really worthy of being an encyclopeia article. This is not an invention by Duncharris, it's an invention by you. Harvestdancer 16:46, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
accrediting
A few things:
1. LBU claims that they are listed in the directory, but they are not listed in the directory. I have changed the article to reflect this.
2. AACTS has no status with any federal agency. Whether or not it "desires" any status with any federal agency is their business. You can put it in the AACTS article if you like. If you can provide a source from AACTS saying they have not attempted to secure status with the government, then go ahead and put it in.